Automated Image Similarity Analysis for Document Approval

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current systems for evaluating and ensuring the appropriateness of graphical documents, such as advertisements, for diverse audiences are inefficient due to the time and expense of manual review processes, and may not adequately prevent the distribution of offensive content.

Innovation Solution

A system and method that automatically processes and compares graphical documents to similar ones for appropriateness, using image processing and optical character recognition to identify content and associate it with concepts, allowing for automated approval and distribution based on stored ratings and similarity analysis.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual review is used to evaluate graphical documents, then content appropriateness can be ensured, but time and expense increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecontent appropriatenessVSAvoidreview time

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system creates a digital copy of the graphical document and processes this copy through automated analysis. The processor extracts visual elements, text, and metadata from the copied document, enabling automated evaluation without requiring manual review of the original, thus reducing time while maintaining evaluation accuracy.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the mechanical manual review process with an automated electronic processing system. The processor uses optical character recognition, image analysis, and database comparison to automatically evaluate content appropriateness, substituting human reviewers with computational algorithms that operate faster and at lower cost.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Reliability

If manual review is used to evaluate graphical documents, then content appropriateness can be ensured, but expense increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecontent appropriatenessVSAvoidreview expense

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The system processes a digital copy of the graphical document through automated analysis pipelines, eliminating the need for human reviewers to examine each document manually. This copying and automated processing approach significantly reduces the labor costs associated with manual review while maintaining thorough content evaluation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent substitutes expensive manual human review with automated electronic processing systems that use pattern recognition, database comparison, and algorithmic analysis. This mechanical-to-electronic substitution dramatically reduces operational expenses while maintaining or improving evaluation consistency and reliability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Productivity

If automated processing is used to evaluate graphical documents, then time and expense are reduced, but content appropriateness may be compromised

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvereview efficiencyVSAvoidcontent appropriateness

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The automated evaluation process is segmented into multiple specialized analysis modules: visual element extraction, text recognition, metadata analysis, and database comparison. Each segment focuses on specific aspects of content appropriateness, allowing the system to comprehensively evaluate documents through coordinated automated processes that maintain reliability while improving efficiency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary processing layer between the graphical document and the approval decision. This intermediary automated processor analyzes the document against established criteria and provides an evaluation report, serving as a mediator that ensures consistent, objective content appropriateness assessment without requiring manual intervention, thus maintaining reliability while enhancing productivity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS7639898B1Method and system for approving documents based on image similarity

Publication Date: 2009.12.29 GOOGLE LLC

AI summary

A system and method for comparing graphical content (e.g., images) of documents for approval, rating, and other uses are provided. Information may be stored about one or more graphical documents. Graphical content of a first graphical document being evaluated for distribution may be compared to at least one second graphical document. An approval determination may be made for the first graphical document based on the stored information about the at least one second graphical document and the comparison.